No, that's just made up.

bump

Which is easily understandable because the crime scene techs scrubbed the sink with swabs like they were cleaning it ensuring to mix whatever they were picking up.

Your source for this is guilter insanity basically. You can actually prove it's mixed blood iirc but that didn't happen nor did the prosecution ever argue it iirc.

Again the only blood of Amanda's was on the faucet and it wasn't related to the murder nor mixed with any of Meredith's blood.


Pro Tip: The guilters aren't a source moran.

On this page we can see 239 contradicting himself yet again.

In post #27809 hes says there is no Knox blood.

In post #27818 he says there is Knox blood.

Trying to have it both ways, whatever is convenient atm.

239 has a reckless disregard for the truth.

239 likes making stuff up and claiming forensic science is some kind of conspiracy.

This strawman laced witch hunt is fascinating guys. Of course I've always said the exact same thing about this which it makes it that much more amusing.

Guilter wiki ftw!

No, it's not. Judge Massei made a bunch of bizarre findings wrt to the bathroom but he clearly said:

He also specifically said she had no wounds.

New to the thread and not as versed as all of you, but has anyone given concrete evidence on what exactly the motive of Knox and her boyfriend was supposed to be?

Like I get it that there is a theory that they were all sex perverts and the victim was killed as some part of an elaborate sex thing, but is there a history of that with either Knox or her boyfriend? Have either of them even done anything violent in the past?

Since it seems Massei is now an authority with you (like Guede was a page or so ago), let's see what he has to say about the mixed DNA samples:

"It should also be noted that the statements according to which the traces in the sink and in the bidet each constituted a single specimen correspond to the act of cleaning the victim’s blood, an action previously mentioned and during which it would have been easy to leave a mixed sample, constituted precisely of biological material from the victim (blood) and biological material from whoever was cleaning (cells lost during scrubbing/rubbing).

It should further be noted that such mixed trace specimens, with the morphology shown, were found both in the sink and in the bidet. It should be considered that those in the sink occurred when Amanda, as has been said, washed her hands which were stained with Meredith’s blood; in the bidet it should be considered that they [the traces] originated from a similar activity, but in relation to the feet, which must also have been covered with blood as can be inferred from the print of a bare foot left on the sky-blue mat, stained with Meredith’s blood.

The mixed trace specimens found in the sink and in the bidet and on the box of cotton buds therefore signify that Amanda, soiled with Meredith’s blood, entered the bathroom which was right next door to the room in which Meredith had been stabbed; putting her hand against the door she left a mark on it and the dribble of blood which remained is a sign [proof] of this, and left a mark also - still with Meredith’s blood - on the light switch; she touched the cotton-bud box which was on the sink and left a mixed trace specimen of herself and of Meredith; to clean her hands she used the sink in which, through the act of scrubbing, she left her own biological trace mixed with that of Meredith, and used the bidet, most likely to wash her feet, which must have become bloodstained in Meredith’s room, where there were widespread and abundant traces of blood even on the floor, and where the blood was spattered over various parts of the room, and also in the bidet [303] she left a trace specimen of what appeared to be diluted blood, which contained both her own DNA and that of Meredith."

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...sei_Report.pdf
(quoted section begins on page 280)

Knox not only had her victim's blood on her hands, but on her feet.

Open and shut case against Knox.

Rudy Guede, who was present that night, says it began as an argument about Knox stealing money from Meredith.

239 says there is a 'mountain of evidence' for Guede's state of mind that evening, but hasn't even come up with anything 'proving' motive.

It's hard to parse what exactly is going through a coke fiend's mind - other than the desire to do more cocaine.

https://truecrimespodcasts.com/2014/...edith-kercher/

People expecting a logical and sensible explanation for a brutal murder might be setting themselves up for disappointment.

FFS, Scott Peterson could have just gotten a divorce instead of killing his wife and child.

dino,

you might wonder if there is any evidence that Solecito or Amanda were doing cocaine

Yes those are some of the bizarre findings I was referring to. The reality is the video evidence of the collection clearly shows the crime scene techs scrubbing inches wide areas of the sink all but ensuring whatever was in the sample would be mixed. It'd actually be more surprising if they didn't find mixed samples with how they were collected.

Guilter wiki, ftw!

Like a lot of things involved with this case there are lines of inquiry that are less than 100% undeniably true.

Like Guede's alleged career as a burglar. No concrete evidence of that.

Or 239's claim that there is a mountain of evidence that Guede had a motive to murder a casual acquaintance. Actually just an empty claim.

The problem with establishing a 'motive' is that ESP and mind reading is bunk. No one knows what is going on in someone's mind.

We can only go by what the evidence shows people did, without falling victim to the romantic notion that we can really know 'why' or that the motives make any rational sense.

According to Proudfootz it was premeditated although he hasn't told us how Amanda and Raf duped Guede. The reality is there is no motive that makes sense for the three of them doing it and the money fight makes no sense either. Why in gods name would the other two rather than breaking up a fight decide to join in and kill her?

Contrast that to Guede saying he was there before Meredith got home and having no reason to lie, quite the opposite actually. An eyewitness had caught him doing the same thing weeks before and Guede pulled a knife on him. Also a matter of weeks before the murder he was caught with stolen property from other burglaries while trespassing / stealing in another place by an eyewitness. No there is no evidence that could indicate why Guede would kill Meredith after she came home and surprised me and could id him.

Right, and I'm saying you have zero evidence Amanda ever used cocaine. Because you don't.

You're the guy who says Massei is correct, except of course when he rulers against your prejudices.


I just thought it useful for readers to see the material you leave out when you commend Massei's findings.

I didn't commend him, you just can't think your way out of a paper bag. There is a difference between Massei reporting the evidence and rendering his lolfantastic interpretation and opinion about it. I don't expect you to understand the nuance because your thinking is so biased and black and white.

I don't have any evidence Knox used weed, although she admits to it.

She was so high, she can't seem to remember if she was at her boyfriend's house or at the cottage listening to Meredith getting murdered.

ahahahahhaha now we're back to REEFER MADNESS

Incredible.

Proudfootz maybe take a debate class and focus on the part where they instruct you to respond to the content of what the other person is saying, jesus. You're a better troll than the rest of the guilters though I'll give you that

I never said Sollecito and Knox duped Guede. So why should I come up with a hypothesis to 'explain' something I never claimed?

You really are way out in left field on this tangent.

This hang up about 'motive' really seems to have you so hung up that it's causing you to deny forensic science.

We can never really 'know' the motives of anyone (hint: mind reading is not real) so it's best to let the evidence take the lead.

When did he say that? Not in the Skype conversation already discussed.

Citation is needed.

Now you claim Guede has no reason to lie when he says he had a date with Meredith, they engaged in consensual sex, and goes on to inform us that Knox or Sollecito are responsible for the murder?

You keep flipping back and forth on this.

Logical Consistency, thy name is not 239!

Yes, lots of people like to involve themselves in cases. Some even have sighted Elvis!

Perhaps this also explains this eyewitness account of Knox threatening someone with a knife on the night of the murder?

"I saw two people who were behind the dustbin and they started to shout. We began to argue and out of nothing the girl drew out a knife. She shouted at me and pointed it at me. I am certain it was Amanda Knox. With her was Raffaele Sollecito."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ith-knife.html

Buying stolen property is different than being a burglar. Perhaps a dictionary of the English language would help you out?

As I expected, not even a molehill of evidence, let alone a mountain.

Not sure where you get the idea that people who get high are incapable of crimes.

Plus we have the fact that Knox was in contact with a cocaine dealer (I know - cocaine isn't a drug!).

Not sure what prompts you to make this remark - I've rebutted just about everything you've posted line by line.

What are you saying?

When you can't imagine a reason for Guede to lie (because it aligns with your theory) he is telling the truth, but when he says anything that doesn't fit with your ideas he is lying?

When Massei says something to agree with he is a model of rational thought, but when his reasoning leads him to state that Knox is guilty he is crazy?

When forensic scientists indicate Guede was there it is good science, and when forensic scientists shows Sollecito and Knox were also present at the crime scene they are incompetent boobs?

Everyone can see through your special pleading. You just make the Amanda Groupies like like dishonest trolls.

It is a fascinating contrast between the reasoning of an experienced jurist like Massei and a fatuous fanboy like yourself.

Not sure what the 'wiki' has to do with it - it is direct link to a translation of a court document originally written in Italian.

I don't see you quoting any documents in Italian.

What is surprising about your amateur critique of the forensic science is that if the mixture of DNA in the blood samples is 'to be expected' because Meredith and Knox lived in the same house, why is there no mixture of Meredith's DNA with the other two house mates who lived there longer?

Yet another 'coincidence'?